Miller et al v. Board of Regents of the University of Minnesota
Shannon Miller, Jen Banford and Annette Wiles |
The Board of Regents of the University of Minnesota |
0:2015cv03740 |
September 28, 2015 |
US District Court for the District of Minnesota |
DMN Office |
Hennepin |
Leo I. Brisbois |
Richard H. Kyle |
Employment |
28 U.S.C. ยง 1331 |
Plaintiff |
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
Document Text |
---|
Filing 752 ORDER granting 731 Motion for Summary Judgment.(Written Opinion) Signed by Judge Patrick J. Schiltz on 4/22/2021. (CLG) |
Filing 699 ORDER. IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT: 1 Defendant's motion for judgment as a matter of law, a new trial, or remittitur 628 is GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART. a. The motion is GRANTED to the extent that the Court conditionally grants a new trial on the issue of past non-economic damages. b. No later than 12:00 noon on Friday, September 20, 2019, plaintiff must file a letter stating whether she will remit $2,250,000 of the jury's $3,000,000 award of past non-economic d amages. If plaintiff chooses to remit, the Court will enter judgment. If plaintiff chooses not to remit, the Court will schedule a new trial on the issue of past non-economic damages. c. The motion is DENIED in all other respects. 2. Plaintiff& #039;s motion to amend the judgment 624 is GRANTED IN PART. a. Plaintiff shall recover $71,529.14 in prejudgment interest on the backpay award. b. Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1961, plaintiff is entitled to recover post-judgment interest a ccruing from the date of the original judgment at the rate of 2.56 percent computed daily and compounded annually until the date of payment. 3. Plaintiff's motion for attorney's fees and non-taxable costs 618 is GRANTED IN PART. Plaintiff shall recover $2,327,772.63 in attorney's fees and $99,445.55 in expenses. (Written Opinion) Signed by Judge Patrick J. Schiltz on 9/6/2019. (CLG) |
Filing 615 ORDER granting in part and denying in part 601 Motion for Reinstatement or Front Pay. IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT: 1. Plaintiff's motion for reinstatement or front pay 601 is GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART. 2. Plaintiff shall recover from defendant the total sum of $4,206,110, consisting of (1) $461,278 in front pay and future benefits; (2) $ 744,832 in back pay and past benefits; and (3) $3,000,000 in other past damages. LET JUDGMENT BE ENTERED ACCORDINGLY. (Written Opinion) Signed by Judge Patrick J. Schiltz on 2/13/2019. (CLG) |
Filing 501 ORDER. IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT: 1. UMD's motion for summary judgment on Annette Wiles's claims 75 is GRANTED. All of Wiles's federal claims are DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE AND ON THE MERITS. All of Wiles's state claims are DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE FOR LACK OF JURISDICTION. 2. UMD's motion for summary judgment on Jen Banford's claims 82 is GRANTED. All of Banford's federal claims are DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE AND ON THE MERITS. All of Banford' ;s state claims are DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE FOR LACK OF JURISDICTION. 3. UMD's motion for summary judgment on Shannon Miller's claims 79 is GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART. All of Miller's federal claims -- save her Title V II discrimination and Title IX retaliation claims -- are DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE AND ON THE MERITS. All of Miller's state claims are DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE FOR LACK OF JURISDICTION. 4. UMD's motion for separate trials 273 is DENIED AS MOOT. And 5. UMD's motion to exclude the expert testimony of Donna Lopiano, Ph.D. 69 is DENIED WITHOUT PREJUDICE. (Written Opinion) Signed by Judge Patrick J. Schiltz on February 1, 2018. (CLG) |
Use the links below to access additional information about this case on the US Court's PACER system. A subscription to PACER is required.
Access this case on the Minnesota District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System
- Search for Party Aliases
- Associated Cases
- Attorneys
- Case File Location
- Case Summary
- Docket Report
- History/Documents
- Parties
- Related Transactions
- Check Status
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.